On August 10, 2026, the Cybersecurity Bureau of the Ministry of Public Security publicly released 15 typical cases of fabricated and disseminated rumors related to flooding and disaster situations, several of which involved internet users from Shenzhen. Some individuals used AI tools to tamper with the "Typhoon Weather Delivery Safety Notice," while others spliced footage of U.S. hurricanes to falsely depict the disaster scene of Typhoon "Hongxia." All of them were ultimately subjected to administrative penalties by public security authorities in accordance with the law. Meanwhile, false information such as "a building in Wenzhou, Zhejiang, was collapsed by typhoon winds" also circulated online, which upon verification turned out to be an artistic installation. Rumors are frequent during typhoon season, and an ordinary person casually forwarding such content may already be crossing the legal line. This article, from the perspective of a Shenzhen lawyer, breaks down the legal liabilities behind online rumors, the scale of administrative penalties, and how ordinary citizens and businesses can use the law to protect themselves.

Why are typhoon rumors so prevalent? How does the law define "fabricating and spreading rumors"?

When natural disasters such as typhoons strike, the public is highly sensitive to disaster information, and under emotional tension, unverified videos and screenshots are easily forwarded rapidly. Among the cases released by the Ministry of Public Security, netizen Chen Moumou from Shenzhen edited and spliced footage of a U.S. hurricane, falsely claiming it was the disaster scene of Typhoon "Hongxia"; another Chen Moumou used AI tools to tamper with the government-issued "Typhoon Day Delivery Safety Notice" and spread it on social platforms. These acts are already clearly regulated under Article 25 of the Public Security Administration Punishments Law: those who spread rumors, falsely report dangers, epidemics, or police emergencies, or intentionally disrupt public order by other means, shall be detained for not less than five days but not more than ten days, and may be concurrently fined not more than 500 yuan; where circumstances are relatively minor, they shall be detained for not more than five days or fined not more than 500 yuan.

From the perspective of legal practice, when public security organs determine an act as "disturbing public order," actual serious consequences are not required; it is sufficient that the act itself has the realistic possibility of disturbing public order. During a typhoon, a false notice of "classes suspended, businesses closed, work halted" may trigger public panic, panic buying of supplies, and even affect the normal progress of disaster relief efforts, and its social harm is self-evident. It is worth noting that even if the publisher's original intention was merely to "remind friends and family to stay safe," as long as the content is proven to be false and has been disseminated, administrative penalties may still be imposed.

2. How is liability determined for AI-generated false information?

Among the cases released this time, some netizens used AI tools to generate fake class suspension notices and tamper with official documents—a new development that deserves attention. After the implementation of the *Interim Measures for the Management of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services* in 2023, provisions have been established regarding labeling obligations for AI-generated content and the responsibilities of service providers. However, the legal liability of individuals who use AI tools to create rumors has not been reduced as a result.

From a legal logic standpoint, AI is merely a tool, and the user is the subject of conduct. Regardless of whether the content is generated by AI, as long as the publisher knowingly or should have known the information is false and still disseminates it, it constitutes "spreading rumors" in the legal sense. A Shenzhen netizen used AI to alter a government notice screenshot, which is essentially no different from manually using Photoshop—only the technical means have been upgraded, and the legal characterization remains unaffected.

Furthermore, if AI-generated content involves defamation or slander of others, it may also violate the provisions on the protection of the right to reputation under Article 1024 of the Civil Code, and the infringed party has the right to demand cessation of the infringement, an apology, elimination of the impact, and restoration of reputation. If the circumstances are serious enough to meet the filing standards for the crime of defamation under Article 246 of the Criminal Law, criminal prosecution may also be faced. Lawyers advise that when using AI tools to generate content involving others or public events, manual review must be conducted, and one must not publish it directly.

Third, forwarding is not a shield from liability: spreading rumors also incurs responsibility, and platforms also have obligations.

Many people think, "I just forwarded it, I didn't create it," but this idea does not hold up legally. According to Article 25 of the Public Security Administration Punishments Law, the subjects of the act of spreading rumors include both the fabricators and the disseminators. Forwarding expands the reach of false information and likewise disrupts public order. In judicial practice, public security authorities also impose penalties in accordance with the law on rumor spreaders whose forwards are substantial in volume and have a severe impact.

The "Regulations on the Governance of Online Information Content Ecology," implemented in 2021, further clarified the legal responsibilities of online information content producers and service platforms. If online platforms fail to fulfill their information review and handling obligations in accordance with the law, they may face penalties ranging from warnings and fines to suspension of operations for rectification. For ordinary internet users, taking two steps before forwarding can significantly reduce legal risks: first, check whether the information source is an official account or authoritative media; second, check whether the content includes verifiable elements such as specific times, locations, and people. For information with unknown sources and strong emotional provocation, it is better to refrain from forwarding one more post than to cross the legal red line.

4. What to do if you are slandered and defamed? A Shenzhen lawyer teaches you three steps to protect your rights.

Faced with online rumors, victims are not helpless. With a thriving internet industry in Shenzhen and a high incidence of online infringement cases, lawyers have summarized a three-step rights protection path in practice:

First step: preserve evidence. Immediately take screenshots and screen recordings of the infringing content, and save data such as the publisher's account information, publication time, and forwarding volume. If necessary, you may apply to a notary office for notarization of the web page evidence to ensure its validity.

Second step: require the platform to delete. According to Article 1195 of the Civil Code, the right holder has the right to notify the network service provider to take necessary measures such as deletion, blocking, or disconnecting links. The notice shall include preliminary evidence and identity information. If the platform fails to handle it in a timely manner, it shall bear joint liability for the expanded portion of the damages.

Third, pursue legal accountability. For minor cases, reports may be filed with public security authorities to request administrative penalties; if reputation has been damaged, civil litigation may be initiated to claim compensation for losses and demand a formal apology; if the rumors lead to serious consequences, such as damage to a company's goodwill or psychological distress for individuals, criminal private prosecution may be considered. When companies in Shenzhen encounter commercial rumors, they may also pursue compensation for damages from competitors in accordance with the Anti-Unfair Competition Law.

V. Conclusion: Typhoons can be prevented, but rumors must be addressed.

Typhoons come every year, and rumors get refreshed every year. From a legal perspective, behind every piece of false information lies a provocation to public order and an infringement on the rights and interests of others. Public security authorities continue to carry out the special "Clean Cyberspace" campaign, reflecting a firm commitment to the rule of law in cyberspace. As ordinary citizens, strengthening our ability to discern information and being cautious when forwarding content is both self-protection and a way to safeguard the public interest. Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm is deeply rooted in local legal services in Shenzhen, with extensive practical experience in areas such as online infringement, reputation rights disputes, and administrative penalty responses. If you or your enterprise are troubled by rumors, you are welcome to consult professional lawyers to protect your legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law.